akaBruce's comments

For anyone else viewing on mobile, I had to switch to desktop to see the creators, filters, and search.

The author mentions

> After all I’ve been a full stack dev for a little bit (just graduated college!)

I'm guessing they differentiate being a dev (professionally or looking for work) from a student perhaps?

I don't know if this is the same experience for you, but for a while I would just open the camera app without realizing I had to swipe over to Google Lens mode to have it detect QR codes.

Moved to Tokyo from the US in 2020. I first heard of the SDGs in language school.

They're also heavily promoted in my work's orientation and training material, but the hq's over in Europe.

I've seen it in the wild maybe two times at most. Once in Ikebukuro as part of some volunteer clean up thing and another on some building somewhere.

So to me, it's not completely unheard of, but "suddenly everywhere" is still definitely a huge stretch.

I believe this discussion is about the same issue with their browsers not blocking Microsoft-owned trackers:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31490515

For those studying a language that might use benefit from this, I have this CSS in my Anki cards. I use the ruby tag to remind me of readings for things that aren't the main focus of the card I'm working with. For example, if a vocab word is used in an example sentence, but one of the other words in the example is unfamiliar to me.

It shows the rt tag on hover or focus and works for me for both mouse and touch on Anki and AnkiDroid. Maybe this or some variation might help others as well.

  ruby {
   text-decoration: underline dotted;
  }
  ruby rt {
   visibility: hidden;
  }
  ruby:hover rt, ruby:focus rt {
   visibility: visible;
  }

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but would that work? I'm assuming (it wasn't clear) the goal there would be to display the person's whole face in a non-distracting way. But if the OLEDs are transparent and they're projecting the image that person's face, the projection would be both forwards and backwards, so the camera would just capture the space between that person's eyes instead of you.

Can transparent OLED's have a unidirectional display?

For whatever it's worth, I just downloaded 1.9.5 for Windows from https://msysgit.github.io/. While the release notes don't mention "CVE-2014-9390" explicitly, it does say this:

Changes since Git-1.9.4-preview20140929

New Features ...

Bugfixes

* Safeguards against bogus file names on NTFS.

Edit: Actually, there it is on their git hub releases page. https://github.com/msysgit/msysgit/releases/tag/Git-1.9.5-pr...

Honest question. Not just for knappador, but anyone else who wants to chime in. How do you all feel about a single piece of glass vs. actual buttons?

Personally, I tend to prefer real buttons more often than not. I'm fine with tapping and swiping when I'm just browsing stuff (browser, certain apps, etc) on my phone or tablet.

But I feel like if there's 9 or more buttons grouped closely together (maybe less), an interface where I can feel the boundaries between buttons without activating them and get a physical response when pressing them is just better.

I wonder how many people feel just a touch interface is on par or better. I know I've never really gotten used to typing on my tablet like I do my keyboard. But maybe I just need to spend more time with it.

Have you tried recently? I don't remember the steps, but they let me create a public page for my YouTube account. I still have one Google/Google+ account, but all my YouTube stuff (videos, playlists, favorites, etc) is tied to that public page, which I've locked down on Google+.

So my channel still has my original YouTube name and comments won't be made with my real name.

Well, not only if your phone is in a call, but also your phone number, device id and the number of the person you're connected to.

Read phone status and identity: Allows the app to access the phone features of the device. This permission allows the app to determine the phone number and device IDs, whether a call is active, and the remote number connected by a call.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.facebook.k...

And don't worry if your friend has the Facebook app and calls you if you don't have a profile. They can just search through your friend's contacts to associate your number with a shadow profile of you anyway.

That's not so bad compared to the other permissions on there. With Facebook, I'd guess (maybe incorrectly) you're already listing your phone number on there and they'll eventually get it anyway. I'd like to know the reason behind some other things on that permissions list...

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.facebook.k...

* Directly call phone numbers: Allows the app to call phone numbers without your intervention. This may result in unexpected charges or calls. Note that this doesn't allow the app to call emergency numbers. Malicious apps may cost you money by making calls without your confirmation.

* Read phone status and identity: Allows the app to access the phone features of the device. This permission allows the app to determine the phone number and device IDs, whether a call is active, and the remote number connected by a call.

* Write call log: Allows the app to modify your device's call log, including data about incoming and outgoing calls. Malicious apps may use this to erase or modify your call log.

* Read call log: Allows the app to read your device's call log, including data about incoming and outgoing calls. This permission allows apps to save your call log data, and malicious apps may share call log data without your knowledge.

Account management I can understand. Location makes sense for checking-in and what not. Reading/modifying contacts also makes sense if you'd like it to manage your contacts automatically.

The call logs are the ones that really confuse me. The only thing I can think of that would make sense is charging for Facebook Credits via your carrier and trying not to confuse the user into thinking they're getting charged twice (once via the Facebook App and once more via the phone call).

I think the article suggests using modifiers instead. So rather than having

  .mainContentWidget {
    background-color: white;
    font-size: 1.5em;
    text-transform: uppercase;
  }
  .sideBarWidget {
    background-color: red;
    font-size: 1.5em;
    text-transform: uppercase;
  }

  <div class="mainContentWidget"></div>
  <div class="sideBarWidget"></div>

The article instead would suggest you do:

  .widget {
    background-color: white;
    font-size: 1.5em;
    text-transform: uppercase;
  }
  .widget-sidebar {
    background-color: red;
  }

  <div class="widget"></div>
  <div class="widget widget-sidebar"></div>

To address the bit about common values vs. special modifications. The implication is, although you might have to change some names, it's not context dependent. So if you decide that you want to put apply that same style to a widget in your footer ...and the header ...and this special case on a certain page landing page ...etc, then you just add the extra class to your HTML rather than adding a bunch of context dependent rules in the CSS.

If the server running on links.example.com, wouldn't the 3rd party web server lose out on doing things like setting cookies in the client's browser or determining their rough location via IP address?

Not that I'm particularly a fan of either practice, but there's probably some use cases there that would have to be accounted for in some way that the 3rd party service could accommodate.

They don't seem to do anything. Searching without the brackets seems to give the same results for me.

https://www.google.com/search?q=inurl%3Abcode%3D*%2Bn_m%3D*+...

Going through my own inbox for Facebook emails, it attaches my email address in the n_m parameter, the bcode parameter, and a mid parameter to all the links it gives me. This includes links to my friends' profiles, events, group posts, etc.

As far as an expiration on the auto-login, I rarely click on the links Facebook provides in my email. (I like to get the notification to remind me to go on Facebook later.) The last one I got was about 25 hours ago. I didn't use the link before and it did not log me in when I clicked it just now.

Oh, sorry. I misread "In any case, I'm actually really interested in the comment about spite Gruber makes at the end." as "In any case, I'm actually really interested in the comment Gruber makes at the end. Can anyone answer that?"

So I interpreted the comment at the end as "They want people to use the website."

I'm going to start by saying I really don't know, but here are my guesses. It's all about the way they collect data for advertising and for analytics.

For example, Twitter gives you the option to tailor itself (its ads?) based on the websites you visit. http://i.imgur.com/EWU2l.png Facebook tracks you with their Like button, I imagine Twitter is doing something similar. And while they can track you while logged out, they would probably be better off if they could tie that information to all the followers, followees, and behaviors associated with an account.

My second example is embedded tweets. Although I can't find the article or blog post, I remember seeing a while back that Twitter wanted to start pushing people to use their embedded tweets rather than images. https://dev.twitter.com/docs/embedded-tweets

Aside from providing the user with a better experience (like being able to click on the users' names to go to their profiles) or letting Twitter control the user experience, this also allows Twitter to embed tracking pixels. Highlighted in this picture are the tracking pixels loaded in Chrome when I embedded the latest tweet from the Twitter account on a web page. http://i.imgur.com/SeVaQ.png

And this next example wasn't made for the web, but it plays into how they're trying to boost their own analaytics. While wrapping every link with their t.co url shortener does give them control over thing like killing spam links, it also lets them track which links became popular from which tweets. That's why they'll still use their t.co links on already short links (reminder: in my opinion). I believe this solution works out for them because if someone clicks a link from their official Android app or from a 3rd party app like MetroTwit, they can still track the referral came from a tweet.

To summarize, I believe they're trying to boost their advertising relevance and trying to improve their analytics offerings to business accounts by using browser cookies.

The hash iterations are due to vBulletin's life span and being a product. They had md5 hashed passwords. Then they realized they have to salt them. So instead of adding the the salt to the password then hashing it, they decided to add the salt to the hash so they could salt every password without having to wait to get the original password.

Oh, I see now. I had assumed that because I couldn't get the response, that the request itself was blocked.

Thanks!